If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

View Poll Results: The Question of Dew-Claws

Voters

266. You may not vote on this poll

I expect a breeder to remove them, and would not buy a dog with it's dew-claws intact

11242.11%

I prefer dew-claws to be removed, but would consider a breeding where they were left intact.

8732.71%

Dew-claws are not a consideration to me. It doesn't matter to me whether they are left intact or not

259.40%

I would prefer dew-claws to be left intact and more breeders should consider this option.

While I prefer having them removed by the breeder, I would purchase a pup with them intact and have the removed at the first time they needed sedation due to an injury, while having hip x-rays or spay and neutering if I have no intention of breeding. Like I said in the other thread I have had my YLM tear the dewclaw, with his light colored nails it was never an issue keeping them trimmed short. So certainly wasn't caused by the nail being to long rather a hard charging dog going through brush who caught a branch and nearly tore all the tendons loose.

I am with Julie R. The stats show that for those of us that breed, it makes the most sense to continue to remove them and it fits with my own experiences on long, multi-day hunt trips. A few of the dogs that have traveled with us for OOS hunts have had dew claws intact and we had problems with 2 dogs with both feet dew claws torn. It took the dogs out of the last several days of hunt. That said, we have cuts around base of the nails on all the dogs also, but can usually let them keep hunting. The dew seems to be a more severe injury when it does happen. For many people, i would imagine it is not an issue. The minority opinion that adamantly oppose, i wonder how much of it is actually from a belief that is physically better with claws on, vs. not liking the practice from psychological. If anyone has multiple independent and peer reviewed journal articles, please post them. Citing one article is scientifically questionable and i would want to look at the stats and their method of statistical analysis to see if it pans out. Having published several scientific journal articles, i can say without a shadow of a doubt that most scientific debates have more than one side and their are publications that support and claim statistical significance for their view. Frankly, as i close in a doctorate and have read hundreds of peer reviewed articles, it is dis-enchanting how much bias exist in our science. I have even been told by a journal reviewer which citations i needed to add, all of which had one common author, and the citations were not even relevent for my article. I withdrew my submission and went to another journal. Scientific articles are great for digging up facts, but the statistical support and how they derived conclusions play a big part in how much i buy into the conclusions....

i would love to see peer reviewed articles statistically comparing injury with and without. Everything comes at a price, so removal of dew claws probably increases some other risk. But having put dogs on the truck with torn dew claws and never had one develop foot problems, i hedge my bet on less injury without dew claws in 15 mi hunt days.

I am with Julie R. The stats show that for those of us that breed, it makes the most sense to continue to remove them and it fits with my own experiences on long, multi-day hunt trips. A few of the dogs that have traveled with us for OOS hunts have had dew claws intact and we had problems with 2 dogs with both feet dew claws torn. It took the dogs out of the last several days of hunt. That said, we have cuts around base of the nails on all the dogs also, but can usually let them keep hunting. The dew seems to be a more severe injury when it does happen. For many people, i would imagine it is not an issue. The minority opinion that adamantly oppose, i wonder how much of it is actually from a belief that is physically better with claws on, vs. not liking the practice from psychological. If anyone has multiple independent and peer reviewed journal articles, please post them. Citing one article is scientifically questionable and i would want to look at the stats and their method of statistical analysis to see if it pans out. Having published several scientific journal articles, i can say without a shadow of a doubt that most scientific debates have more than one side and their are publications that support and claim statistical significance for their view. Frankly, as i close in a doctorate and have read hundreds of peer reviewed articles, it is dis-enchanting how much bias exist in our science. I have even been told by a journal reviewer which citations i needed to add, all of which had one common author, and the citations were not even relevent for my article. I withdrew my submission and went to another journal. Scientific articles are great for digging up facts, but the statistical support and how they derived conclusions play a big part in how much i buy into the conclusions....
i would love to see peer reviewed articles statistically comparing injury with and without.Everything comes at a price, so removal of dew claws probably increases some other risk. But having put dogs on the truck with torn dew claws and never had onedevelop foot problems, i hedge my bet on less injury without dew claws in 15 mi hunt days.

A few have mentioned that they have seen far more injuries to regular nails than dew claws. To me the reason for that is rather obvious. Regular nails are pounding the ground at every stride. Just shows which is actually functional.

it was an inference. if u prefer them to be removed then u have an opinion about them in a negative light. otherwise u would not care one way or the other and select option 3. thus that leads one to believe if you had the option for them to be removed (if dog was under anesthesia for any reason spay, neuter, injury, etc) then you'd prolly take advantage of the situation and have them removed

dew claws are just weird in my opinion. it has been awhile since ive seen a dog with them. my sister brought her australian shepherd over and i was petting it and trying to teach it shake for her and i noticed the dew claws. they are just dangling and feel like u could brake them off with your pinky and thumb. the nail is like 3x longer and sharper than the rest and just feel weird. her vet told ger when she takes it in to get spayed that he would advise her to get dewclawed i said good for your vet and you should. its just going to get hung up on something or scratch someone.